Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Captain Copyright Targets Kids 430

Posted by Zonk
from the up-in-the-sky-what-is-that dept.
frank249 writes "The Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency has set up a copyright education website called Captain Copyright. There is a section for kids with comic books and a section for teachers for grades 1-3, 3-6 and 6-8. An example of a grade 1 class activity: 'Present the following situation to students: Your friend is downloading a song off the Internet. In comes Captain Copyright. Ask: What do you think Captain Copyright will say? Encourage students to brainstorm. Then hand out (or read) Line Master: Some Copyright Laws.' In Canadian law it is incorrect to download a song unless you pay for it. They also neglect to mention that Canadians pay a tax on blank media that is meant to compensate artists for downloads."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Captain Copyright Targets Kids

Comments Filter:
  • by D4C5CE (578304) on Friday June 02, 2006 @07:20PM (#15458852)
  • Blank Media Levy (Score:4, Informative)

    by 0xA (71424) on Friday June 02, 2006 @07:25PM (#15458887)
    They also neglect to mention that Canadians pay a tax on blank media that is meant to compensate artists for downloads.

    This is incorrect, the blank media levy was designed to compensate artists for people copying CDs and other recordings. The "Download Question" was not seriously considered at the time the levy was introduced and it is a matter of opinion if it applies to downloads.

  • Re:Funny. (Score:5, Informative)

    by DeeKayWon (155842) on Friday June 02, 2006 @07:26PM (#15458891)
    What with this being Canada and all, there's no reason for any two word phrase matching that description to show up. There is reason for one that starts with "Fair" and ends with "dealing" [wikipedia.org], though.

    Canadian law and American law are not the same? Shocker!

  • by FooBarBlatDing (681076) on Friday June 02, 2006 @07:55PM (#15459105)
    They also neglect to mention that Canadians pay a tax on blank media that is meant to compensate artists for downloads.

    Not really. The tax is meant to cover copies made from legitimately obtained originals, as in when your friend loans you his CD or you borrow it from the library. In Canada it has been ruled that the blank media tax covers this and it's legal to copy the CD, whatever the RIAA or whomever may think. I don't think that the download case has been tested.

    I agree with the previous poster who pointed out that there is no reason for this to appear in curriculum except private interests. Having them drive curriculum is dangerous and inappropriate.

    Foo

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02, 2006 @08:53PM (#15459417)
    Don't be ridiculous.

    In 2005, the movie industry's total domestic revenue [boxofficemojo.com] was a bit shy of $9 billion.

    Intel Corporation's revenue in the same period [google.com] was almost $39 billion.

    So that's one company in one sector of the economy (albeit a big one) makes, all by itself, over four times what the entire movie industry makes.

    While we're here, let's toss off some other revenue figures: IBM earned over $91 billion, Microsoft nearly $40 billion, General Motors almost two hundred billion dollars. GM lost more money last year than the movie industry earned in total (not counting expenses), and barely noticed.

    The Copyright Cartel has done an excellent job as portraying itself as a critical industry, but don't be fooled. They are, at best, a miniscule piece of the American economy.

    Software is somewhat of a different story, but they have their own ridiculousness (BSA), and you'll notice that of the companies cited, only one of them makes most of their money because of software copyrights.
  • by lkypnk (978898) on Friday June 02, 2006 @08:54PM (#15459424)

    I've not had the displeasure of sitting through this; they aim it at the younger grades (14, 15 years old). While the website for "Captain Copyright" emphasizes intellectual property rights, the in-class indoctrination mostly talks about not plagarizing, so at least at my school, I think fairly little harm is being done.

    Even better, I have heard many of my peers mocking "Captain Copyright" and many seemed quite well informed about the law concerning fair dealing and had strong opinions on why the current copyright system is wrong or broken (at least according to them, who seem to want to justify the downloading of music.)

    As to aiming copyright law indoctrination at young children, well, thats just plain wrong. Private industry should not attempt to sugar-coat something like this as an educational aid and offer free material to teachers; nor should those teachers fall for such easy tricks! In a world where from every angle comes marketing ploy for corporations, is there nothing left sacred? Even a child's education? We should teach our children to be critical of everything they receive, I hope this material is being portrayed in such a light at school, instead of being force-fed to the students.

  • by plasmacutter (901737) on Friday June 02, 2006 @09:22PM (#15459529)
    It has been deemed legal by their lawmakers [com.com] and courts [chartattack.com] and since the laws and court decisions have not changed/been overturned to make them illegal, this is simply false.

    screw these liars trying to pervert and poison the minds of impressionable youth! get it through your heads you greedy corps, it's not illegal in canada!, and the majority of the public doesn't consider it wrong where you've bought the laws making it illegal in other nations!
  • Re:Not gonna fly (Score:3, Informative)

    by pete-classic (75983) <hutnick@gmail.com> on Friday June 02, 2006 @09:57PM (#15459673) Homepage Journal
    Excuse me, but the term "Super-hero" is jointly trademarked by Marvel and DC.

    I only wish I were kidding. According to Wikipedia they are U.S. Trademark Serial Nos. 72243225 and 73222079 [wikipedia.org]. (And believe me when I tell you I scoured the site for any use of the term. No dice. They may be dead-ass wrong, but I admire their consistency.)

    -Peter
  • by sn00ker (172521) on Friday June 02, 2006 @10:17PM (#15459772) Homepage
    What the **AA is right about is that "intellectual property" is a critical industry to the US economy... I don't have numbers, but it is probably the most profitable sector as America continues to fall behind making quality electronics, cars, etc.
    You really should've checked up on the numbers, before you looked like a total idiot.
    Microsoft is the largest "soft" IP company (that is, they aren't known for making tangibles), and it's half the size of IBM. Microsoft is also roughly four times the size of the entire Hollywood movie industry. It's half the size of IBM, which in turn is: half the size of General Motors; a third the size of WalMart; a quarter the size of ExxonMobil.

    The xxAA side of the entertainment industry could curl up and die tomorrow and the US economy would barely notice. The music and movie industries combined (roughly USD21b in 2004) don't equate to Sun and Apple together, never mind the dozens of individual companies that turn over many multiples of that figure.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03, 2006 @02:47AM (#15460531)
    how about what BF Skinner did to his daughter?

    Do you mean this:
    http://www.snopes.com/science/skinner.asp [snopes.com]?

This universe shipped by weight, not by volume. Some expansion of the contents may have occurred during shipment.

Working...